Have you seen White Hot: The Rise & Fall of Abercrombie & Fitch?

It’s a new documentary currently trending on Netflix which offers insight into the questionable ethics of fashion brand Abercrombie & Fitch which reigned supreme in the 1990s and early 2000s, particularly amongst the American youth.

Essentially, the CEO at the time, Mike Jeffries, built the brand on exclusivity by catering solely for the ‘cool kids’.

He actually said, in a 2006 interview: “We go after the cool kids. We go after the attractive all-American kid with a great attitude and a lot of friends. A lot of people don’t belong, and they can’t belong. Are we exclusionary? Absolutely.”

There is, of course, myriad HR issues stemming from this statement alone, and the way in which Jeffries ran the company. Let’s delve into just what A&F did wrong, and ultimately why the fashion brand tumbled into scandal after scandal, and lawsuit after lawsuit.

You might remember their infamous slogan tee line and how it ventured into racist territory back in 2002 when a number of t-shirts were released featuring controversial caricatures and slogans. They were considered by many to be offensive and disrespectful to minority communities.

Whilst this is not technically an HR issue, it does bring to the fore a major discrimination concern – as does the brand’s refusal to carry plus-sizes until 2014.

And if we’re talking discrimination, we need to discuss A&F’s recruitment practices. The clothing brand famously had a hiring policy based completely on physical looks and body shape prior to 2015.

One former store manager even disclosed the fact that there was a guidebook created by HQ which went into detail – with accompanying images, if you can quite believe it – to illustrate who and what was acceptable, and what was not.

Spoiler: dreadlocks, headscarves and facial hair were not allowed as they didn’t comply with their notion of a typically blonde-hair, blue-eyed “All-American”: An outrageous approach I think you’ll agree, given that the USA is a culturally diverse nation and should encourage individuality…

In fact, at the height of Jeffries’ leadership, more than 90 per cent of their store staff were white.

And those that weren’t were often shunned to back-office jobs and out-of-hours schedules. Shocking stuff, right? Well, it gets even worse.

The documentary interviews a number of ex-workers who were let go on account of their ethnicity.

Jennifer Sheahan was dismissed after a senior member of the corporate team ‘noticed a bunch of Asian people in the store’ and Anthony Ocampo lost his job when he was told there were already ‘too many Filipinos working there’; a particularly problematic scenario given that Ocampo had never even disclosed his ethnicity and this was based on pure assumption.

So, what’s the HR verdict here?

All workers are able to raise a claim for discrimination if they feel they are being disadvantaged in the workplace due to a protected characteristic they hold.

Here in the UK, there are nine protected characteristics in total: age, disability, sex, pregnancy/maternity, race, religion/belief, sexual orientation, gender reassignment and marriage/civil partnership. Treating an employee less favourably based on any of these reasons is likely going to put employers at a significant risk of discrimination claims.

Even at the recruitment stages, this can lead to claims of discrimination. This means not hiring, or refusing to interview someone because of their physical appearance, their accent, their clothing, their name, or their ethnic origins could see employers face unlimited compensation payments, just like A&F did.

Employers should not make assumptions about a person’s capabilities based on any factors which are not related to their experience, qualifications, knowledge, and skills. Using objective selection criteria ensures each candidate is scored based on their merits alone and reduces the risk of unconscious bias or discrimination. As such, employers should strongly consider adopting this as part of their recruitment strategy.

The MADtv sketch famously hit the nail on the head when it portrayed the incompetence of A&F store staff, highlighting the importance of hiring a candidate based on skills and experience rather than looks…

Businesses can also consider wider approaches to encouraging workplace inclusion. For example, introducing diversity and unconscious bias training for managers and communicating a clear zero-tolerance approach to any form of bullying, discrimination, or harassment.

The blatant racism directed towards minority store staff results in a class-action racial discrimination lawsuit in 2003, which was eventually settled for £50million. Though A&F never admitted to any wrongdoing, they were subject to a consent decree and had to recruit a diversity officer.

But how effective is this role?

Having a dedicated person in the workplace whose sole focus is to improve diversity can be greatly advantageous for businesses and employees alike. However, it’s imperative that this person works in close collaboration with the staff pool and does not make any decisions based on their own opinions or that of a small group. To be successful, a diversity officer should consider the workforce as a whole, and ensure each person’s wants and needs are adequately represented and supported.

The diversity officer should look at all aspects of the employment lifecycle and critically analyse whether these are inclusive for all. In some cases, their feedback might be hard to accept, but senior leaders must be open to constructive criticism and change if they want to enjoy the benefits of a diverse workforce.

When done properly, diversity officers can contribute significantly to improved motivation, satisfaction retention and productivity across the workforce.

Another contentious issue that came up in the documentary was A&F’s haphazard use of zero-hours contracts which meant many members of staff were left in the dark about whether they were still employed by the company when available hours appeared to dry up.

Whilst they can have their uses, both for businesses where there is ever-changing and fluctuating demand for a particular role, and for staff who require flexibility and are not willing or able to commit to long-term employment, A&F was reported as abusing zero-hours contracts by many former staff members.

The rule of thumb is that whether a fixed-hours worker or zero-hours staff, workers should receive basic statutory protection, not be discriminated against, and any dismissals should be conducted fairly. A&F failed on all counts here.

And let’s not forgot the inappropriate behaviour of A&F photographer Bruce Weber, against whom at least 20 allegations have been brought against in relation to sexual assault with the models he was working with.

Employers have a duty to make the workplace a safe and comfortable environment for all staff members. This includes taking proactive steps to prevent harassment at work. Workplace training, sexual harassment policies, a clear and communicated zero-tolerance attitude and support to report incidents of sexual harassment can help with this.

It must be said that since the departure of Mike Jeffries in 2014, and the subsequent enlisting of Fran Horowitz as CEO in 2017, the brand appears to be harnessing a much more inclusive approach when it comes to recruitment (with now more than half its workforce being non-white), and their customer base, which is evident through their revamped marketing campaigns.

It’s good to see that the business practices of Abercrombie & Fitch pre-2015 seem to be becoming a thing of the past, with a focus now on being inclusive and providing equal opportunities. However, more can still be done to ensure true diversity and inclusion within organisations.

Traditional recruitment methods won’t be enough to support this. Instead, businesses should proactively consider ways they can support individuals from underrepresented groups, both internally and externally.

Businesses can utilise positive action as part of their recruitment strategy to achieve this, examples of which include: putting statements in job adverts to encourage applications from under-represented groups, such as “we are an equal opportunities employer and welcome applicants from all backgrounds and ethnicities”; offering training to help certain groups get opportunities or progress at work; offering mentoring to groups with particular needs; or hosting open days specifically for under-represented groups, to encourage them to get into a particular field.

Diversity and inclusion initiatives are imperative to ensure the fair and equal treatment of all staff members and to close the gaps of employees from underrepresented groups. Ultimately, doing so will enhance the working environment and provide a well-rounded staff force which businesses can leverage to optimise success.